Appeal No. 2003-1112
Application No. 09/520,892
application server, but the examiner does not indicate what specific element of
Yamauchi corresponds to this element. (See brief at page 8.) The examiner repeats
the same content of the rejection in the answer at pages 4-5. In the response to
arguments portion of the answer, the examiner maintains that the facsimile machine of
Yamauchi is really a telecommunication and processing system that contains language
translation processor. (See answer at page 7.) Additionally, the examiner indicates
that “Yamauchi teaches a network server (see items 4 and 5) and that application
server and applications (e.g., items 6, 7, 9, and 10) since the software for the
translation must be included in the application server hardware to perform the
processing. Furthermore, since an ‘application server’ is a processor that executes an
application, Yamauchi teaches the application server . . . The application server then
distributes the document to the processing location which converts the received
documents into one or more electronic document formats.” (See answer at pages 7-8.)
We disagree with the examiner’s interpretation of the teachings of Yamauchi. From our
review of the teachings of Yamauchi, we find at most that Yamauchi teaches the use of
either a network or an application server, but not both. Furthermore, we find the
correlation of items 6, 7, 9, and 10 in Figure 1 to be unreasonable since there does not
appear to be any server type function carried out by these elements as recited in the
language of independent claim 1. Claim 1 requires that “an application server
connected to said network server to receive documents transmitted thereto, and which
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007